Using materials for quasiparticle engineering

The fundamental excitations in superconductors – Bogoliubov quasiparticles – can be either a resource or a liability in superconducting devices: they are what enables photon detection in microwave kinetic inductance detectors, but they are a source of errors in qubits and electron pumps. To improve operation of the latter devices, ways to mitigate quasiparticle effects have been devised; in particular, combining different materials quasiparticles can be trapped where they do no harm and their generation can be impeded. We review recent developments in these mitigation efforts and discuss open questions.

Learning from the report of the independent medicines and medical devices safety review: “first do no harm”

This is a review of the learning points from the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review, 1 chaired by Baroness Julia Cumberlege CBE DL. This system-wide review was initiated by the then Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, following patient-led campaigns. It looked at how the “healthcare system reacted as a whole, and how that response can be made more robust, speedy and appropriate”. We aim to highlight the learning points for doctors in Obstetrics and Gynaecology as these are relevant to our current practice and future changes in our healthcare system. These are: Aims of the review: why it was initiated and how it was conducted Overarching themes and missed opportunities to prevent avoidable harm Three clinical scenarios: their histories, issues and adverse events associated with their use and the current response in Scotland The hormone pregnancy test - Primodos The anti-epileptic drug - sodium valproate Surgical mesh for prolapse & incontinence The recommendations made by the review and implementation guidance Responses to the review, such as apologies issued by BSUG 2 /BAUS 3 /RCOG, 4 and compensations schemes such as the Scottish scheme as recommended by the review

Islamic Law on Mediation in Indonesia; Position and Strategy

This paper is about Islamic Law on Mediation in Indonesia; Position and Strategy. Islamic law in the context of its position and strategy towards national law becoming positive law has sparked ongoing controversy since independence until now. The various strategies and explanations about them give a special style to the peculiarities of Islamic legal thought in Indonesia. This paper focuses on how the position and strategy of Islamic law in the positivization of law in Indonesia. The plurality of Indonesian law, which is a necessity, becomes a positive partner for Islamic law towards the positivization of legal law nationally. The strategy taken is to unite perceptions which are the substance of Islamic teachings in the meaning of sharia and fiqh in the form of universality values that exist in Islam such as the substance of justice, honesty, equality, balance and the like. The concept of mediation in Islamic law must be in accordance with PERMA No. 1 of 2016, its position and strategy. Mediation is nothing more than facilitating the negotiation process, where a mediator tries to help the parties negotiate effectively and efficiently so that they can reach the decisions they want. There are two simple rules for mediators proposed by Stitt, namely the first is do no harm.

Health Journalism and Representation of Campaign News of Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) Patients

Health information in all forms and developments from media must benefit public health. The prime responsibility is to spread the correct information in a clear and simple way. The purpose of this study includes the evaluation of campaigns published in the Turkish press under expressions that were used specifically for reporting on spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) patients, such as “be hopeful” and “running out of time.” Discourse analysis method in the context of health journalism was used within a framework of ethical principles. In the context of this study, the discourse of language published—that is, news created by health journalists during treatment processes of SMA patients and their families—was also examined. This study was conducted in order to increase awareness of health correspondents and is informed by a basic principle of “first do no harm” to public health, consistent with medical professionals.

Introduction

This is a book about living solid organ donors as patients in their own right. It is premised on the supposition that the field of living donor organ transplantation is ethical, even if some instantiations are not, eg, pre-mortem organ procurement of an imminently dying patient. In this chapter, the objection to living solid organ donation based on the obligation to do no harm is rejected because it ignores the fact that for many living donors, the benefits outweigh the harms. It is argued that the principle of respect for persons permits some living solid organ donation provided that both the donor and the recipient are treated as patients in their own right. This chapter then provides an outline for the rest of the book in which a five-principle living donor ethics framework is developed and applied to various living donor transplant proposals.

Offsetting, Denialism, and Risk

In Climate Matters John Broome defends two claims. First, if you live a “normal life” in a rich country, you will probably cause significant harm by your emissions of greenhouse gas (GHG), violating a moral duty of harm-avoidance. Second, you can satisfy this duty by offsetting your emissions. Some would deny Broome’s first claim on the grounds that an individual’s emissions of GHG do no harm. Broome calls this position “IndividualDenialism” (ID) and in a recent paper he attempts to refute it. I explain how, if Broome’s refutation of ID were successful, it would undermine his claim that you can satisfy your duty of harm avoidance by offsetting. I suggest an alternative defence of the claim that you can satisfy your individual duty to reduce your carbon footprint by offsetting. This alternative defence assumes that your duty to reduce your carbon footprint derives from a duty of risk-avoidance.

P-BN53 The ‘Difficult Gallbladder’: do no harm!

Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for a ‘difficult gallbladder’ can incur increased risk of biliary complications. In these challenging conditions where anatomical delineation (commonly through the critical view of safety) is unachievable, it is important to recognise when to proceed and when to consider a bail-out strategy. Subtotal cholecystectomy (SC), cholecystostomy insertion, conversion to open or abandoning the procedure are accepted solutions. In this study we review the outcomes of patients who underwent LC following previous intervention. Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent LC under a single surgeon between January 2009 to July 2020 following a previous intervention with LC, SC or cholecystostomy tube insertion. Data was collected with regards to demographics, clinical presentation, intraoperative details, imaging, conversion to open, length of hospital stay and complications. Results 40 patients with previous intervention underwent LC. Previous intervention included abandoned LC in 24(60%), on-table cholecystostomy in 8 (20%) and SC in 8 (20%), with 5(13%) converted to open. Reasons for referral included adhesions, intrahepatic gallbladder, possible malignancy, empyema and abnormal anatomy. Laparoscopic approach attempted in 39/40 (98%), conversion to open in 25%. Reasons for conversion included cholecystoduodenal fistula, and suspected malignancy. Median hospital stay was 4 days (1 – 22). Morbidity was seen in 2(4%) with no biliary complications. Completion of treatment, from previous intervention to definitive LC was 9 months (1-48). Conclusions In patients with previously attempted cholecystectomy, LC is feasible and can be performed with low morbidity. When faced with a difficult gallbladder intra-operatively, aborting the procedure and re-attempting at a later date, locally or referral to a specialist Unit, should be considered.